Covid cases, hospitalizations, death trends and other touchy subjects…

[Tacenda]

43 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

KF94 from Korea. I find them very comfortable and they don't have the beak. I use them when I have to wear a mask or can't socially distance in low ventilation places. I think a lot of mask wearing is theater. If I'm going to wear a mask, I now wear one that is proven to help me and others. Also, I wear glasses and don't having the same level of fogging issues with them.

Thanks for the idea!  I do wear my mask for protection of myself and for others, and not for theater lol, because people in my area don't like them. So I feel I have to be brave to wear them places and the worst is around friends and family, haven't quite got up to that level of brave...I'm still an insecure person in my old age. So in reality, I might talk the talk, but walking isn't all there yet. So not theater for me. 

[Tacenda]

8 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

Just an FYI, KF94 also provide space and are stiff enough that I found talking and breathing easier because they don't get 'sucked in.' I was really surprised because I actually prefer them over surgical masks. Can we at least acknowledge surgical masks work better than cloth and they are super accessible and cheap? It's a very low bar to hit. With all this government pandemic money, schools could hand new ones out daily.

*I do believe mask wearing in elementary school has not been proven scientifically to help at all. I am more with the WHO on children and masks. https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/q-a-children-and-masks-related-to-covid-19

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/08/the-science-of-masking-kids-at-school-remains-uncertain.html

I sub in the classroom in the elementary schools, if you were to spend a day in the classroom you might see how the masks help. They aren't quite as kosher as adults with covering their snot. Or coughing in their sleeves etc. Yes, they might sneeze into the masks and have lots of snot, that's when the teacher should have them get a new one at the office. But it at least stayed in the mask, protecting others. I have had this happen and had the child get a new one. 

[Rain]

18 minutes ago, juliann said:

Then let's try it this way. If you had two cars, one with 26% decrease and one with 90%, would you use the 26% or advise others to? Would you be culpable, given both cars were available, if they randomly picked the 26% and had a deadly outcome? 

I would choose to tell other people about the 90% one, but would recognize that ultimately they are the ones choosing and that if the person feels like they are being forced to buy a car they will probably buy the cheaper one. 

It is not that I am against education on masks.  I am all for it.  I've seen quite a bit of talk about them.  I just recognize that I am dealing with a lot of people who don't care or actively fight against them.  Then there is the idea of mask conversation fatigue.  

So I can be trying to get the word out to so many who don't want to hear or don't care and are tired of the conversation or I can be grateful when they wear a 26% mask and watch that little by little people are recognizing there are better masks.

I have had enough people mocking me and my family about wearing a mask at all.  I don't feel it would be effective to go out sharing among many people I am around that there are better masks.  However, I got the kf94 masks that bsjkki was talking about.  I was pleasantly surprised when someone asked me about it and wondered if it would be good for her.  Then I was able to tell her about them.  

So this isn't a matter to me about whether it is good to share news about effective masks.  Of course it is!  But right now in many of my circles it is a way to make the subject of masks combative which means if I start teaching about more effective masks then those around me become more firm about not wearing them at all.

[juliann]

 

12 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Aye, there’s the rub. All the theorizing and studying in the world means nothing unless we can account for human nature. Shaming, cancelling, silencing, ostracizing,  removing basic rights, and using brute force appear to be the go-to methods of dealing with it. In the meantime, it would be simple to stop the promotion and sale of less effective equipment and practices and replace them with better ones. Why not?

Why the hell isn't this plain 'ol common sense?? How stupid are we going to look in hindsight as we wail about rising cases while we applaud people for wearing bad masks badly?

[bsjkki]

Have schools taken steps to improve ventilation? From AMC, a movie chain.https://www.deseret.com/entertainment/2020/9/10/21430732/amc-entertainment-movie-theaters-air-filtration

Aron said: “But much more important than that, we’ve invested literally millions and millions in high-tech solutions. We’ve upgraded our air filters to MERV 13. It’s about four times the filtration that we had prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. We’ve bought electrostatic sprayers for all of our theaters so that we’re spraying down out auditoriums with these electronically charged cleaning solutions, so we’re all over both tough and airborne transmission of the virus.”

[MustardSeed]

4 minutes ago, juliann said:

 

Why the hell isn't this plain 'ol common sense?? How stupid are we going to look in hindsight as we wail about rising cases while we applaud people for wearing bad masks badly?

I simply assume that people who wear Bad masks badly are people who are resistant And are trying to make a point about their rights.

[smac97]

Not sure if anyone has posted this yet:

Quote

Last week I posted an August 29, 2021 article written by Jeffery A. Tucker for the Brownstone Institute titled, “The World Health Organization Oversold the Vaccine and Deprecated Natural Immunity.” 

In my post, I pointed out some irrefutable facts from Mr. Tucker‘s article, such as how, up until the rise of Anthony Fauci to near godlike status, it was commonly accepted science that “vaccines and natural exposure were regarded as partners in disease mitigation.” Still, today for some strange reason, the CDC, the WHO, the NIH, Big Pharma, and their complicit lemmings in the mainstream media are now portraying vaccination and natural immunity as somehow competing with one another. 

I highlighted Mr. Tucker‘s contention that the most extensive studies done yet comparing COVID-19 vaccines to natural infection demonstrate that natural immunity is more powerful in preventing infection than any regimen of vaccines (a truism that would have surprised no one 50 years ago).

---

I reiterated Mr. Tucker‘s point that “COVID-19 is a textbook case of how the immune system scales naturally to take on the newest pathogens that always have and always will vex the world” and that vaccines will “necessarily be more hit-and-miss, simply because of the pace of mutation and the emergence of variants.” 

I applauded Mr. Tucker‘s citation of the recent Israeli study that indicates there is “good news for patients who already successfully battled Covid-19, but [research] shows the challenge of relying exclusively on immunizations to move past the pandemic. People given both doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine were almost six-fold more likely to contract a delta infection and seven-fold more likely to have symptomatic disease than those who [had acquired natural immunity through previous infection].”  

I agreed with Mr. Tucker‘s contention (and with that of every other thinking human being up until about five minutes ago) that when “you contract a virus and fight it off, your immune system encodes that information in a way that builds immunity to that virus.” And that “when this happens to enough people, the virus loses its pandemic quality and becomes…. manageable. This is what one would call virology/immunology 101.” 

I thanked Mr. Tucker for reminding us that “this fascinating dynamic in cell biology is a major reason why public health became so smart in the 20th century. We kept calm. We managed viruses with medical professionals: doctor/patient relationships. We avoided the Medieval tendency to run around with hair on fire but rather used rationality and intelligence.”  

Here's the actual article being referenced above: The World Health Organization Oversold the Vaccine and Deprecated Natural Immunity

Here's a response to this article (on Twitter) :

Quote

You keep ignoring the costs of non-vaccination — far greater number of deaths, greater chance of new variants, and pressure for lockdowns. The very large majority of those dying or permanently harmed are unvaccinated. You coddle this group.

 

 

Nearly all COVID deaths in US are now among unvaccinated

Nearly all COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. now are in people who weren’t vaccinated, a staggering demonstration of how effective the shots have been and an indication that deaths per day — now down to...

apnews.com

Thanks,

-Smac

[juliann]

10 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I simply assume that people who wear Bad masks badly are people who are resistant And are trying to make a point about their rights.

Based on the limited data we have, almost everyone who wears cloth masks is wearing a bad mask badly. If it gapes or fogs glasses, it is worn badly, which is what cloth masks do.  (Speaking as an American, that we do not have study upon study about all of this stuff is also criminal, BTW.  Look at how often we have to refer to non-American research.)

[Rain]

19 minutes ago, juliann said:

 

Why the hell isn't this plain 'ol common sense?? How stupid are we going to look in hindsight as we wail about rising cases while we applaud people for wearing bad masks badly?

Who is applauding people wearing bad masks badly? 

[MustardSeed]

2 minutes ago, juliann said:

Based on the limited data we have, almost everyone who wears cloth masks is wearing a bad mask badly. If it gapes or fogs glasses, it is worn badly, which is what cloth masks do.  (Speaking as an American, that we do not have study upon study about all of this stuff is also criminal, BTW.  Look at how often we have to refer to non-American research.)

Interesting.  
Are you pro appropriate mask? 

[juliann]

1 minute ago, MustardSeed said:

Interesting.  
Are you pro appropriate mask? 

Yes, have I not made that really, really clear?  Including that I use a kn95 mask myself? 

[juliann]

4 minutes ago, Rain said:

Who is applauding people wearing bad masks badly? 

Anybody who encourages or excuses untested, unverified crappy cloth masks (or any such mask when there are verified masks available) during a life and death pandemic. I recommend Consumer Labs for testing, BTW, although they are a subscription service.

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, juliann said:

Which is a prime example of how people respond if someone discloses that we are not being protected well by most of the masks we have been told to wear when there are much much better masks available. 

So buy a better mask since you seemed concerned about quality.

[Teancum]

16 minutes ago, Rain said:

Who is applauding people wearing bad masks badly? 

She is doing the straw man thing.

[bsjkki]

20 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Not sure if anyone has posted this yet:

Here's the actual article being referenced above: The World Health Organization Oversold the Vaccine and Deprecated Natural Immunity

Here's a response to this article (on Twitter) :

Thanks,

-Smac

There are no numbers in the AP article on the number of deaths from reinfection. Only on the vaccinated vs unvaccinated deaths so I don't understand how it is response to the original article. It seems to be discussing two different things. I think post infection, studies have shown one shot helps create a 'super immunity' situation for people. That is the strongest combo. At first they said not to get the vaccine for 4 months but now they are saying you can get it as soon as you recover. I would love to have the numbers on people who have second infections. Israel found more breakthrough cases the further people were out from vaccination and I would like to know that same timeline for post infection. What percentage of deaths are happening in those with their 2nd infection? Hospitalization? Cases?

[pogi]

18 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Not sure if anyone has posted this yet:

Quote

In my post, I pointed out some irrefutable facts from Mr. Tucker‘s article, such as how, up until the rise of Anthony Fauci to near godlike status, it was commonly accepted science that “vaccines and natural exposure were regarded as partners in disease mitigation.” Still, today for some strange reason, the CDC, the WHO, the NIH, Big Pharma, and their complicit lemmings in the mainstream media are now portraying vaccination and natural immunity as somehow competing with one another. 

First Smac, we can do without the derogatory articles. 

Second, what is "irrefutable" about this?  No one is or has ever suggested that natural infection doesn't play a role in herd immunity.  Strawman.  What is irrefutable is the fact that vaccinations are always preferred over natural infection - that is kind of the point of them, to keep people from getting seriously sick.  Lets not uphold natural immunity as the gold standard and start having Covid parties, much like we had pox parties when we were younger before the vaccine came out. 

Quote

 I highlighted Mr. Tucker‘s contention that the most extensive studies done yet comparing COVID-19 vaccines to natural infection demonstrate that natural immunity is more powerful in preventing infection than any regimen of vaccines (a truism that would have surprised no one 50 years ago).

He doesn't understand immunology.  No one could have predicted "50 years ago" how a hypothetical vaccine with technology that didn't even exist or was even conceived of 50 years ago would compare with natural infection in terms of immunity.  The fact is that some vaccines ARE more effective than natural immunity, and yes, we did know that 50 years ago!   This is nonsesne.  

The fact is that the initial results of the vaccine were EXTREMELY promising with efficacy levels reaching at or above what we see with natural immunity in most diseases.  Delta changed things.

This is dangerous garbage upselling natural immunity as somehow preferred to vaccination, as if it is better.

"natural immunity is more powerful in preventing infection".  I had to laugh at that one!  Ummmm...hello!  Natural immunity REQUIRES infection in the first place!!!  It is not therefore a preferred method of "PREVENTION".

The goal is NOT immunity by any means possible.  The goal is to reduce the burden of disease and suffering and hospital overwhelm, while reaching herd immunity. 

Quote

I agreed with Mr. Tucker‘s contention (and with that of every other thinking human being up until about five minutes ago) that when “you contract a virus and fight it off, your immune system encodes that information in a way that builds immunity to that virus.” And that “when this happens to enough people, the virus loses its pandemic quality and becomes…. manageable. This is what one would call virology/immunology 101.” 

Again, who is refuting this???  He is setting up a strawman, pretending like this is some big secret the government is trying to hide. 

Quote

I thanked Mr. Tucker for reminding us that “this fascinating dynamic in cell biology is a major reason why public health became so smart in the 20th century. We kept calm. We managed viruses with medical professionals: doctor/patient relationships. We avoided the Medieval tendency to run around with hair on fire but rather used rationality and intelligence.”  

I guess he forgot about the Spanish flu in the 20th century.  Yes, they too were running around with their hair on fire.  Yes, masks were just as hotly debated back then too.  No, a vaccine did not exist and the only preventative measure was masking/distancing/hygiene/shutdowns (which all happened).  To downplay vaccines in light of natural immunity would have been seen as immoral during the Spanish flu.  Public health would have given anything to have a vaccine for the Spanish flu like we have for Covid today.  Nothing has changed.  Public health is not corrupted as he portrays. 

 

 

 

[juliann]

5 minutes ago, Teancum said:

So buy a better mask since you seemed concerned about quality.

I do. Do you?  How is that response any different than those who claim that unvaccinated people are only hurting themselves? (hint: it's not)

 

5 minutes ago, Teancum said:

She is doing the straw man thing.

Now you are sounding like an anti-masker if you think advocating for the best masks available, that actually can prevent transmission, is a "strawman." 

[bsjkki]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I sub in the classroom in the elementary schools, if you were to spend a day in the classroom you might see how the masks help. They aren't quite as kosher as adults with covering their snot. Or coughing in their sleeves etc. Yes, they might sneeze into the masks and have lots of snot, that's when the teacher should have them get a new one at the office. But it at least stayed in the mask, protecting others. I have had this happen and had the child get a new one. 

Why are kids who are coughing and sneezing in class? If allergies, they are no danger and if that is not known, they should be at home. We did not have covid but did get a nasty cold in my household which produces a lingering cough. We have had 9 negative covid tests. If there is a child coughing and sneezing in class, they should be able to produce that negative covid test or not be there. We really need to change the equation about sending sick kids to classrooms.

[bsjkki]

5 minutes ago, pogi said:

This is dangerous garbage upselling natural immunity as somehow preferred to vaccination, as if it is better.

I read the article and that is not what I got out of it. Natural immunity is longer lasting and stronger. I didn't read anyone advocating that people should purposely get infected to get 'natural immunity.' But when we are discussing vaccine passports etc... there is no reason not to acknowledge it. In Europe it is part of their equation.

Edited September 7, 2021 by bsjkki

[Rain]

6 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

I read the article and that is not what I got out of it. Natural immunity is longer lasting and stronger. I didn't read anyone advocating that people should purposely get infected to get 'natural immunity.' But when we are discussing vaccine passports etc... there is no reason not to acknowledge it. In Europe it is part of their equation.

In some countries.  France doesn't recognize it for visitors going to restaurants, hotels, museums etc.  I don't know if they recognize it for residents or not in those places.

[pogi]

37 minutes ago, juliann said:

Based on the limited data we have, almost everyone who wears cloth masks is wearing a bad mask badly. If it gapes or fogs glasses, it is worn badly, which is what cloth masks do.  (Speaking as an American, that we do not have study upon study about all of this stuff is also criminal, BTW.  Look at how often we have to refer to non-American research.)

What gives me comfort is that despite imperfect compliance in the lay population, despite that a large chunk of the population refuses to abide, despite that those who try are imperfect, despite the use of some less-effective (but better than zero) fabrics, STONG evidence suggests that masks still work to reduce the burden of disease in population studies.  We do have study upon study, I have posted like 7 studies showing that mandates work.

What I find very interesting is that those who have been antagonistic of masks and mandates from the very beginning are now hyper critical of those who wear imperfect masks, and criticize inconsistently executed mask mandates.  It is like you are all me on steroids, and it is kind of freaking me out!  And yet you all hold your tongue to those who deny that masks even work (you wouldn't want to offend your allies in your party who have the same goal in mind of humiliating the leading party, but from a different angle), and rip into those who counter with "yes they do" claiming that we are causing more harm than good. 

It comes off as political posturing.  It is just trying to get an edge on the opposition and criticize their efforts.   This is done by either 1) refuting that masks and vaccines even work - bringing into question the efforts of the leading party, or 2) becoming hypervigilant and criticizing the imperfect mandates - bringing into question the efforts of the leading party.  Same mission - different approach.    It is one extreme or the other. 

[SteveO]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

Did I promote that?  

Yes, because you said:

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

Whatever. Just wear a mask.

Because without specifics, you’re saying any mask will do.

[juliann]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

I would choose to tell other people about the 90% one, but would recognize that ultimately they are the ones choosing and that if the person feels like they are being forced to buy a car they will probably buy the cheaper one. 

It is not that I am against education on masks.  I am all for it.  I've seen quite a bit of talk about them.  I just recognize that I am dealing with a lot of people who don't care or actively fight against them.  Then there is the idea of mask conversation fatigue.  

So I can be trying to get the word out to so many who don't want to hear or don't care and are tired of the conversation or I can be grateful when they wear a 26% mask and watch that little by little people are recognizing there are better masks.

I have had enough people mocking me and my family about wearing a mask at all.  I don't feel it would be effective to go out sharing among many people I am around that there are better masks.  However, I got the kf94 masks that bsjkki was talking about.  I was pleasantly surprised when someone asked me about it and wondered if it would be good for her.  Then I was able to tell her about them.  

So this isn't a matter to me about whether it is good to share news about effective masks.  Of course it is!  But right now in many of my circles it is a way to make the subject of masks combative which means if I start teaching about more effective masks then those around me become more firm about not wearing them at all.

I wouldn't proselyte prickly individuals. But I do speak up with those who do wear masks (and on message boards) because I think most people probably don't know about how poorly rated some masks are. I assume if they use masks they do want to be protected/protect others. Plus, the kn95s really are more comfortable, I think. 

[Chum]

2 hours ago, Robert J Anderson said:

Like the debunked Rolling Stone article?  I'd like to see how many are actually calling the poison control centers.  "Swamping" probably means a few people calling, it being exaggerated in the reporting, and then other media/social media hype and further exaggeration.

Hey it's Robert. Hi Robert!

You won't get pushback from me about it.  The local news station that originated that story doesn't seem to have contacted the hospital to verify the story.  RS certainly didn't verify the story before publishing.

This was careless, sloppy, unthinking journalism - something that drives me up a wall. I'm beyond frustrated by news orgs who republish press releases from LEO/govs/Biz w/o vetting the info (AT ALL) or including relevant historical context.

[pogi]

32 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

I read the article and that is not what I got out of it. Natural immunity is longer lasting and stronger. I didn't read anyone advocating that people should purposely get infected to get 'natural immunity.' But when we are discussing vaccine passports etc... there is no reason not to acknowledge it. In Europe it is part of their equation.

Than what is the purpose and point of the article.  It sounds like a bunch of hot air and red herrings. 

Quote

I highlighted Mr. Tucker‘s contention that the most extensive studies done yet comparing COVID-19 vaccines to natural infection demonstrate that natural immunity is more powerful in preventing infection than any regimen of vaccines (a truism that would have surprised no one 50 years ago).

What am I to make of this?

What "contention" is there?  This is just an idiotic statement.  He seems to be upholding natural immunity as a "more powerful" wat to prevent infection.  Boggles the mind, this kind of thinking.  He seems to be attacking vaccination efforts in this article, is he not?  As if they are overblown.  Natural immunity or not, vaccination is still recommended and can improve immunity for everyone.